stuff like this just continues to make NBL referees a laughing stock of world basketball...

I have to be honest that doesnt look that bad at all. coaches are always that close to the court, the ref just bumped into him.

however in saying that, and judging from the way gleeson was standing there it seems as though he may have been persistent in arguing with the referees the whole game. can anyone confirm that?

To me, it looked like he saw the ref about to hit him before the ref did and didn't seem too eager to get out of the way. Maybe the ref thought his primary intention was to get his attention, added that on top of other whinging (Crocs were soaking up fouls early in the game) and taught him a lesson? Or maybe he had no time to try and get out of the way and was just bracing?

The tribunal referral is automatic from the report. The report probably suggests the ref thought there was enough there to look at again. So was it worth it or will he get off free?

Cavolo, you are 100% correct. That is just simply bullshit. Ban and fine the ref involved. He has run into a stationary coach, who was entitled to be where he was. Pathetic.

"however in saying that, and judging from the way gleeson was standing there it seems as though he may have been persistent in arguing with the referees the whole game. can anyone confirm that?

Its Trevor Gleeson. Its all he ever does.

For me it looks like he couldnt get the answer he wanted so he decided to stand in the way.

It's ok though, Gleeson has Chuck on speed dial and was probably on the phone to him before Perth shot the free throws.

Disagree Mutley, the referees are there to officiate the game not to listen to a coaches complaints about how the officiating is being conducted. Not only that but for a referee to do his job he needs to watch the game at all times to make the calls. Gleeson was clearly yelling at him and knew perfectly well where he was and could have avoided him. In no way is it the referees job to dodge the coach or anyone else on the bench for that matter.

Also if you look at the referee he never had a chance to look at Gleeson, so from his point of view he got bumped and he would not have been able to tell whether Gleeson did it unintentionally or if Gleeson pushed him with his shoulder.
so to those who say the referee was wrong are being far too harsh. AFL is worse in my opinion with regards to this.

Well if Gleeson was yelling at him I'd submit he had a pretty good idea where he was standing and chose to run into him, then eject him, as he was sick of his complaining. I don't care for Trevor Gleeson, and he was ranting and raving all of Friday night's game as well. But the mechanism for dealing with this is the technical foul.

And no, given Gleeson was standing where he was and the ref changed direction abruptly, he could not have avoided contact.

The way I see the vision provided is that Gleeson stood where he is allowed to, didn't move to get in or out of the way,however, comments in this thread are in my opinion implying that he should have been predicting where the ref was going to run. Gleeson was fine standing where he was (yes he whinges all the time), but I think the ref who was watching the play and made contact with Gleeson (not the other way around), appears to be over zealous and believed it was intentional so ejected him. I think he may well reconsider his opinion once he sees the footage. The other thing to consider is if Gleeson gave him a serious mouthful at the same time the contact occurred and the combination was enough to eject him?

Seriously though, players and refs bump each other worse than this in a game accidentally, and this really does look like accidental and incidental contact with a coach standing where he's allowed to - what's the difference?

Does this mean Flynn got to have his first head-coaching experience? Can anybody confirm who took the reigns?

I was behind the Townsville bench on Friday night and it seemed that the replacement for Reidy was second assistant.....can anybody confirm?

If so, great news. Well done Liam!

I think your blowing it a bit out of proportion with the "coach is supposed to predict where the referee is running" its not like guessing his PIN. When the referee is there on his side of the court go back towards your seat and ill put money down the referee wont be running there.

Mutley, i do agree with what you said though with regards to giving a Tech but not ejecting. ejecting was an over reaction but my argument is that some form of punishment was necessary.

SRT070 on that we agree. Having watched Gleeson in the past I have no doubt he was running his mouth off at everything (hell, he does that when they are winning!). But I think Lyons caused the incident as an alternative way of dealing with him, rather than simply tech fouling him. And I am not sure he is really entitled to do that.

But if he believed that Gleeson was at fault, then ejection may have been the right thing to do, or a warning if he was unsure. You don't give a tech as a lesser penalty because you're not sure, right? I'd say he was confident that Gleeson was at fault by leaning in to get in his way and grab his attention.

Isaac,

What I am suggesting is tech fouling him 5 minutes earlier would have sat him down, hence removing the potential for the collision.

And if he wasn't standing up and getting in the way to make contact prior to that? I don't doubt Gleeson gets warned by the refs every game. I'm sure the tribunal will decide whatever they decide, but Gleeson doesn't look beyond fault in that video to me.

Liam Flynn did take the reigns and also got issued with a tech in the 3rd...

Reidy doesn't coach here anymore, Paul Woolpert is the other assistant.

Just looking at the video again, everyone seems to be missing that Blalock looked like he got fouled quite obviously but went unwhislted which started it off in the first place.

Over the Doomsday Double the Crocs won just 1 Qtr of bball, fouls went 57-32 against us and FTs were 55-26 against us... not a good w/end

This is how it reads:

You have a coach arguing about calls over your shoulder, you run backwards without looking and then happen to run into something, the first thing you see when you turn around to see what it was is an angry coach with his arms up. Ref interprets that as the Coach being offensive.

Had the ref been facing the other way, there would have been some talking, the ref would have moved around Trev, or worst case told Trev to sit down.

Granted the call is dramatized to the max, but I look at it the same way as most contact fouls are called. You man-handle someone, ref advises you to cut it out. You keep going, you get the call against you.

Wouldn't surprise me if the call was a "That's enough, you're done" build-up call.

Mutley, Gleeson getting ejected didn't calm Flynn down - he later got a tech the bench down, they later got a tech.

Well, if the situation wound LIAM FLYNN up to the point that he said something worthy of a tech, then the Townsville people might have a point about the officiating.

Mutley, or both of them are very prone for vocalising their opinions to refs...

Gleeson has become the "boy that cries wolf"!! He bitches about every single play and eventually the refs stop listening. Then in future if he ever does have a valid point it's lost on the referee because he has already switched off! Might wanna learn to pick the fights he wants to fight.

A bit like if you kick a dog. You can kick it once or twice and get away with it. But eventually your going to get bitten. Looks like Gleeson got bitten! I expect a fine.

Gleeson's fault in my opinion.

After throwing his arms in the air at the no call by the ref, he leans forward to try and get into the eyesight of the ref. This makes the contact worse.

I hope his attitude towards referees is taken into account, because he just looks like a tool every time he whinges.

Hopefully this finally shuts him up.

Mutley - in Flynn's time at Sturt, he was well known as one of the biggest whingers around when it came to referees! Doesn't take much to set Liam off.

Sorry anon, I have to agree with DJ Rod. Martin grabs Blalock on the right shoulder with his right hand as Blalock began to elevate. The block attempt after that is clean but the initial grab should have been called.

Nothing that happens on court excuses a Coach not avoiding contact with a referee. When the referee moved down the court past Gleeson at the beginning of the clip, Gleeson was seated. The referee was watching the play and would not have seen Gleeson get up and move into the path the referee had to move in back to the other end of the court. Gleeson was the one who had the eye awareness of the referee's position and it was his responsibility to avoid the contact. Instead of swaying back, he lent forward causing the contact.

Some might say that some refs are a bit precious. They might never get a word in at home so they have to pull on their powershirt and hope they get to blow their little whistle and talk down to somebody. Perhaps the ref needs to watch where he runs. Gleeson was standing off the court and the ref ran into him.

Both the ref and Gleeson were in the wrong.
Ref should have made 1st call on the foul, Gleeson shouldn't have bumped him.

Gleeson could have stepped out of the ref's way but chose not to..

Gleeson made no attempt to move out of the path of the official, who at some point, was going to turn and run down towards the other end of the court. Entirely his fault that contacted occurred

Got to say though, how many times is the ref running outside of the sideline. You can clearly see Gleeson outside of the court. Gleeson is allowed to stand up on the sidelines but is not allowed to enter the court. The coach does not have to get out of the way if he is standing where he is allowed. Granted he was yelling at him at the time, the ref probably had enough of the constant whinging. Still not a reason for an ejection

Spinner, sorry, but that's a load of crap.

It never seems to amaze me the amount of 'referee bashing' that happens on this forum. Isaac tries to adjudicate and the crap (as he put it) still continues.
Cavolo's statement about NBL referees shows his ignorance. If this had happened in any NBA game, the coach would not only have been ejected, he would receive an automatic fine and also be suspended. The NBA is the best basketball on the planet and the referees are "SUPPORTED" by the NBA management. The commentators on NBA games very rarely criticise referees (not like Carfion & Co). Unfortunately, a lot of fans, commentators and journalists in Australia (no matter what the sport) criticise the officials, referees, umpires because they think they know the more than the people controlling the game/s.

Isaac - my delivery may not have been ideal, but my point was that some refs feel they need assert their authority simply because they can. They would not behave or speak to people the way SOME do, if it wasn't for their uniform and whistle.

In this particular case, Gleeson was standing off the court as he is allowed to do. The ref turned and ran into him. There was plenty of room for the ref to run on the court but he chose not to and expected Gleeson to move.

It doesn't matter that Gleeson was standing in his box. He still leaned in to the ref to cause the contact. The ref has no obligation to make sure a coach isn't standing right behind him before he runs the other way.

Spinner, I still think that's bullshit. Refs make calls because it's their job and they certainly don't give it to coaches like they receive from them, not even close. Every ref I've seen in the NBL takes their job very seriously and do their absolute best to make the right calls. FWIW, I don't know a single NBL ref personally. They speak to players and coaches very professionally, going out of their way to give polite warnings and tips during play to try and keep the game flowing. How often do you hear them telling players to watch their arm-bars, or holding, etc rather than just call something straight away. Almost every call is quick and subjective so of course they make some mistakes, but it's a rough job.

The way Australians speak of referees reminds me of the way some people speak of police. F*ckin' pigs, etc. I've had dealings with police professionally (legal issues with websites, working for them on projects) and personally (younger years!) and they have always been exceptionally polite and professional with me. Bad apples are out there, but certainly not so many as to warrant being universally condemned!

The way that some fans speak of refs is something else - like they're a lesser species out there to make up for some failings, that they couldn't play the game themselves, that they have some chip on their shoulders, etc. You want to talk about mistakes, about attitudes, chips on shoulders, egos, white line fever, there are a lot more than just three candidates on a court in an NBL game for that...

Gleeson saw the ref coming and seemed to lean forward to grab his attention. The ref was watching the play intently and had no idea Gleeson was there. As someone said, if that were the NBA, the coach would cop a significant fine. Here, maybe Gleeson could get the benefit of the doubt, but I don't think I'd give it to him based on that fraction of a second before impact. Either way, the dispute isn't really enough to warrant broad-brush ref bashing IMO.

Nice one Isaac. Our refs do a much better job than people give them credit for, particularly when you consider the resources available compared to other pro leagues of a similar standard. Yes, they have bad nights etc but almost every night the result is decided by the players.

I think Gleeson should get a warning. It was an unfortunate circumstance of both people having the right of the same space and being caught out by each other's movements.

The ejection was unwarranted for mine, but I can understand it given the ref was probably caught up in the emotion of Gleeson complaining ad nauseum. Perhaps he sould have been complaining to Blalock for blowing an easy lay-up...

Boti on Gleeson:

OK now. I've watched the incident with referee Damian Lyons and yes, his expulsion was warranted.

You don't bump an official. Pretty simple.

Someone should mention again that Gleeson was in his box, as if that means he did nothing else wrong. He probably should have punched the ref because as long as his feet were in the box then its legal.

From an NBL press release:

The Townsville Crocodiles have informed the National Basketball League (NBL) office that their coach Trevor Gleeson will answer the charges against him via telephone with the NBL Tribunal.

Both groups are wrong here.

1/ Gleeson should have been tossed. Avoidable contact.

2/ The contact is exactly what refs expect players to deal with in the nature of the game. anon 696 above.
Image if you will driving to the basket. Jumping into a position where any contact will knock you down onto a hard surface at speed. And a player fouls you without the referee making a call? Or trying to dribble a ball up the court, onyl a player continuously bumps into you, only the referee doesn't think you are disadvantaged, even though you are unable to pass the ball of because you are stumbling.

The longer referees are coached to 'manage games' and give advantage/disadvantage and allow the game to turn into a rugby match, the more issues that will arise.

That said Gleeson should get matches.

But the force of contact and consequence is makably high. Just ask Brad Hill.

Players dont always know contact is going to occur. ie Ervin unsportsmanlike foul.

anon,

Coaches are going to take advantage of the rules in order to win. If the referees are going to allow contact and 1 coach plays clean and another doesnt. The one that doesnt will lose games and his job, while the one that takes advantage will win and keep his job.

If the refs allow contact and try to not over call the game, coaches will coach to that.

If referees keep calling fouls, coaches and players will adjust.

Because they will win/lose depensing on how well they take advantage of the rules.

Brad Hill incident was an unfortunate accident. That level of contact from behind has occurred a dozen times since Brad unfortunately broke his arm. It was an accident and they happen. Graeme Dann just lost 4 teeth whilst trying to put pressure on a Vukona inbound pass and the fat part of Mika's hand between the thumb and the index finger collected Dann in the mouth dislodging teeth. This was not called a foul and wasn't a foul as it was incidental contact in the course of play. If we adjudicate every action by the result (Hill breaking an arm) Vukona would be up on report for striking!!!

Contact is contact. Unsportsmanlike is heavy/severe contact regardless of if your playing the ball. I'm sick of hearing Brad Hill's foul referred to as the gospel of US fouls. He got fouled from behind and unfortunately landed awkwardly and broke an arm its an accident. Just like Nathan Brown for Richmond AFl got his leg snapped in 2 by a melbourne player trying to soccer the ball off the ground. Free kick yes but not a report. Accidents happen in contact sport.

The ref is a no name who thought he would try and stamp his authourity. Yes Gleeson carries on a bit, but the ref needs to get over himself.

Hill's was one of the clearest USFs Ive ever seen!

No doubt Paul but the injury itself was an accident. Abney's intent wouldnt have been to break Hill's arm!

Agreed. But that is why it is so important that is called a USF. Any good defensive player will try to stop an opponent from scoring an easy basket. But if the refs consistently call potentially dangerous contact a USF players will mostly make the adjustment so those incidences dont occur.

Crocs want to complain about ref Lyons:

The Crocs have opted to have the hearing heard by telephone link-up with Tribunal Chairman Scott Derwin tonight. Both Gleeson and CEO Ian Smythe declined to comment on the record before the hearing, but Smythe did confirm the club had made official complaints of their own over the way Lyons handled the collision as well as several contentious calls during the game. As well as the ejection of Gleeson, assistant coach Liam Flynn was handed a technical foul and bigs Gabe Freeman, Russell Hinder and Luke Schenscher were effectively taken out of the game by halftime courtesy of a soaring foul count.

Realistically how Gleeson treats the refs in other games or prior to the contact has NO bearing at all on this. You CANNOT punish a player or coach because you dont like the way they treated you previously. If your taking anything other than THIS game and THIS contact into account then thank god your not a ref.
Gleeson was standing in the area he was ALLOWED to stand, the ref turned and ran into him. Watch this play without the benefit of slow motion and theres no realistic chance for Gleeson to move out of the way and the Ref has over reacted to contact that he initiated.
If a coach has to sit down during the entire game to prevent this happening the the NBL needs to inform coaches, if they are permitted to stand within a certain area then unless they deliberately run into the ref's they should not be at fault.
I would expect a personnal apology from the Ref in this instance for running into a coach who is standing of the court.

The worst bit about all this from Lyons' perspective is he didnt actually see any of it, he was facing the other way, so therefore guessed when ejecting Gleeson. If one of the other refs had made the call fair enough, but Lyons could not possibly know what had happened.

I apologise if this post was overly positive.

The big point that Gleeson apologists fail to explain is why Gleeson, who had vision of the ref, moved forwards into the Ref.

If you want lyons to apologise for running into Gleeson i want Gleeson to apologise for being a Dickhead for 5 years

In relation to Graeme Dann, any call would be a technical foul on Dann. He can't make contact with the ball or the passer during a throw in. Vukona is passing the ball in which requires Dann to avoid contact with him.

I like the no call on this one.

Sebastian,

Your attitude just shows exactly what people says about refs is actually true.

You would obviously pick on coaches and players you dont like decause of things that happened in previous games in the last 5 years.

Considering you defend that refs 'choose' to not make calls. You yourself would be putting coaches and players into a position where that would feel the need to question decisions due to a lack of consistancy.

And then penalising them for it.

Ganymeade

The post was in contrast to the stupid post asking Lyons to apologise! Possibly the art of sarcasm is lost on you. Sorry about that

The bottom line annon is there will always be ref bashers in Australia because its a religion. If anyone believes a referee can get to the elite level in the sport and cheat, manipulate games, hold grudges and in Ganymeade's own words pick on players and coaches they dont like is ABSOLUTELY KIDDING THEMSELVES!!!! They have no clue how the system works and they dont want to know for that matter. They just want to throw shit from the cheap seats.

Let them call their own fouls because we have all seen how well that works at training sessions when you leave it up to the players themselves. Generally ends in a punch up or a friendly "F*ck you, no F*ck you"! Very constructive.

Gleeson cleared of all charges. Given a warning to do all he can to avoid contact with refs in the future. NBL media release was worded as a reminder to all coaches to be mindful of this.

Good decision by Derwin, handled it well I think.

Guys agree totally with you. Refereeing from the top down is creating an environment that encourages people to question refs. Rather than enforce the rules consistantly, you are agreeing that at times the exact same call isn't made because of'flow of game' or in the 'opinion' of a ref is was wasn'r a advantage.

Also, your attitude show exactly how refs think. dont turn up, see if we care. The coaches would do a better job of it.

I disagree. I was actually in front of the tribunal the week of a grand final for running into an umpire. We were both coming from different directions and neither of us had any idea what had happened until the very point of contact. I was cleared thankfully and got to play in the GF.

Lyons could not have known whether the contact was intentional.

Guys agree totally with you. Refereeing from the top down is creating an environment that encourages people to question refs. Rather than enforce the rules consistantly, you are agreeing that at times the exact same call isn't made because of'flow of game' or in the 'opinion' of a ref is was wasn'r a advantage.



Sorry dude they are the rules. Referees have to interpret advantage/disadvantage. The refs dont make the rules they just try and apply them. Chat to FIBA, it has nothing to do with referees from the top down in Australia, they are the rules.

And yes let coaches blow all the fouls! I'm sure they could run and keep up with the game. Gleeson in this clip shows his insight into refereeing by abusing Lyons. The ball is dribble penetrated from the opposite side of the court Area 6, Lyons is in the centre Area 3/4. Not his call and if he made it across the split line he is looking in the wrong area as his primary area is off ball on this play. Yeah let the coaches call the fouls they would all ball watch and it would be kill or be killed away from the ball! What a brilliant idea to let the coaches ref!!! Why hasnt anybody else thought of that.

Anon, my view is that if the contact isnt intentional then it is not punishable. There is often incidental contact made with refs, it is part of the game. A judgement call has to be made, and Lyons was not in a position to make that judgement.